Hello to all.
I have been working very hard measuring trees everywhere I can.
I do not know if the following link is the most up to date list with Canadian records:
http://www.ents-bbs.org/viewtopic.php?f=376&t=8755
Here are some of my findings over the past many months:
American Beech - 2.57m x 29.1 m (92.2') Bolton, Humber Valley
Eastern Hemlock - 2.16M x 31.3m (102.7') Bolton, Humber Valley
Sugar Maple - 4.78m x 35.01m (114.86) Alliston, Pinery
Red Pine - 1.37m x 31.85m (104.49') Alliston, Pinery
Freemans Maple - 5.84m x 26.27m (86.19') Beeton
Black Cherry - 1.96m x 33.86m (111.1') Happy Valley, Pottageville
European Larch - 2.26m x 24.84m (81.5') Bolton, Humber Valley
Bur Oak - 5.22m x 22.56m (74') Aurora
White Ash - 2.03m x 29.32m ( 96.2') Happy Valley, Pottageville
Red Oak - 3.12m x 33.83m (111') Newmarket, Thornton Bales
Yellow Birch - 3.1m x 24.38m (79.99') Arnprior, Gillies Grove
Eastern Hop Hornbeam - 2.49m x 17.06m (55.97') Mono, Hockley Hills
American Linden - 2.77m x 26.82m (87.99') Leith
American Elm - 4.7m x 27.43m (89.99') Niagara
Paper Birch - 1.95m x 26.61m (87.3') Happy Valley, Pottageville
American Sycamore - 3.91m x 24.69m (81') Niagara
Bitternut Hickory - 2.79m x 33.16m (108.79') Beeton, Heritage Forest
Silver Maple - 5.63m x 26.82m (87.99') Alliston
Butternut - 3.2m x 22m (72.28') Bradford, Scanlon Creek
Dawn Redwood - 4.17m x 27.74m (91.01') Niagara
Eastern Cottonwood - 6.35m x 31.36m (102.89') Baldwin
Red Maple - 3.35m x 30.36m (99.6) Happy Valley, Pottageville
and finally
Eastern White Pine - 3.18m x 44.14m (144.81') Gillies grove
I formally dispute the height record of 154.7' by Steve D'eon. Oddly enough, the white pine listed above is located within 100' of Steve's tree.
Looking forward to your comments.
Kelly
Possible new records for Ontario
Possible new records for Ontario
Last edited by Room100 on Sun May 21, 2023 6:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Re: Possible new records for Ontario
Solid measurements, good to see someone measuring in Canada. Regarding the purported tallest eastern white pine at 154.7', seems like there was a good discussion on it in the preceding thread. I agree that since the sine method was not used to determine that height, the measurement should not be accepted until confirmed with the sine method. Dr. Leverett, Will Blozan and many others have talked about no matter how many mitigation/error detection/correction protocols are implemented for the tangent method, it often when "truth checked" with a sine measurement and tape drop, is well off the mark. It just doesn't pass muster when a very accurate measurement is needed. Your 140.7' measurement for it is likely very close to the actual height.
Re: Possible new records for Ontario
Kelly,
I am still inclined to accept the 47m measurement from Steve D'eon. He exercised great care in allowing for the lean on the pine. Even on level ground with a conifer, there can be some degree of error, but considering the time and effort put into the measurement, by someone who had a high level of experience, it seems to be reasonably accurate. I am certainly open to further debate on it. Your measurement is more accurate than Steve's but the tree was likely taller when he measured it. It had some reiteration when he measured it and it appears to have some degree of reiteration now as well. I would posit that the top broke off and a new leader has been sent up from a bit below the top.
I've been paying close attention to a number of trees on an annual or semiannual basis, and most of the tallest trees have differences from year to year due to a growth/dieback cycle. I don't have many year to year measurements on Eastern white pines. I have noticed variances in one white pine in Big Ivy, in North Carolina. I get a different figure every year, but they're all very close. The Boogerman Pine, in GSMNP, was originally cross triangulated to 207'. It lost a good deal of height after the remnants of a hurricane came through. It made it back to almost 190', and then lost a bit and is likely in the lower 180's now.
I still believe that the Gillies Grove pine likely lost a bit of its crown and was fairly accurately measured. It looks like opinions are that the tree was measured with a degree of accuracy, but that there is certainly room for error. The amount of the error is anyone's guess. I would assume it is less than a meter, considering the care taken in the measurement and the awareness of the lean.
Brian
I am still inclined to accept the 47m measurement from Steve D'eon. He exercised great care in allowing for the lean on the pine. Even on level ground with a conifer, there can be some degree of error, but considering the time and effort put into the measurement, by someone who had a high level of experience, it seems to be reasonably accurate. I am certainly open to further debate on it. Your measurement is more accurate than Steve's but the tree was likely taller when he measured it. It had some reiteration when he measured it and it appears to have some degree of reiteration now as well. I would posit that the top broke off and a new leader has been sent up from a bit below the top.
I've been paying close attention to a number of trees on an annual or semiannual basis, and most of the tallest trees have differences from year to year due to a growth/dieback cycle. I don't have many year to year measurements on Eastern white pines. I have noticed variances in one white pine in Big Ivy, in North Carolina. I get a different figure every year, but they're all very close. The Boogerman Pine, in GSMNP, was originally cross triangulated to 207'. It lost a good deal of height after the remnants of a hurricane came through. It made it back to almost 190', and then lost a bit and is likely in the lower 180's now.
I still believe that the Gillies Grove pine likely lost a bit of its crown and was fairly accurately measured. It looks like opinions are that the tree was measured with a degree of accuracy, but that there is certainly room for error. The amount of the error is anyone's guess. I would assume it is less than a meter, considering the care taken in the measurement and the awareness of the lean.
Brian
Re: Possible new records for Ontario
Nice work on all of the hardwood measurements. You're putting Ontario on the map, almost singlehandedly!
Re: Possible new records for Ontario
Brian
I understand your point of view re Steve's measurements. Just wondering, is the link in the first post of this thread the most current North American list? thx
I am wondering if anyone has been talking about The Eastern Old-Growth Forest Conference. I couldn't find a discussion for it. I wrote to an event coordinator, and I was informed that there are 200 seats. Is anyone planing to attend? ( other than Mr Leverett, of course )
I understand your point of view re Steve's measurements. Just wondering, is the link in the first post of this thread the most current North American list? thx
I am wondering if anyone has been talking about The Eastern Old-Growth Forest Conference. I couldn't find a discussion for it. I wrote to an event coordinator, and I was informed that there are 200 seats. Is anyone planing to attend? ( other than Mr Leverett, of course )
Re: Possible new records for Ontario
Kelly,
Yes, that is up to date. It's also in the Eastern Rucker list, with Ontario on page one, I believe with Maryland. I update the lists whenever new finds are reported, even though it doesn't show up as a new post.
Brian
Yes, that is up to date. It's also in the Eastern Rucker list, with Ontario on page one, I believe with Maryland. I update the lists whenever new finds are reported, even though it doesn't show up as a new post.
Brian